Free - Beyond Collapse

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Why They Hate Peace

A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long
be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign
danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. -James Madison

The most succinct statement about how governments get their people to
support war came from Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg trials after
World War II:

Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some
poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can
get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the
common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for
that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the
leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a
simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a
fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. It works the same in any country.

It is rather frightening that a convicted Nazi war criminal latched onto an eternal truth!
It should be harder to promote war, especially when there are so many
regrets in the end. In the last 60 years, the American people have had
little say over decisions to wage war. We have allowed a succession of
presidents and the United Nations to decide when and if we go to war,
without an express congressional declaration as the Constitution
mandates.

Since 1945, our country has been involved in over 70 active or covert
foreign engagements. On numerous occasions we have provided weapons and
funds to both sides in a conflict. It is not unusual for our so-called
allies to turn on us and use these weapons against American troops. In
recent decades we have been both allies and enemies of Saddam Hussein,
Osama bin Laden, and the Islamists in Iran. And where has it gotten us?
The endless costs resulting from our foolish policies, in human lives,
injuries, tax dollars, inflation, and deficits, will burden generations
to come. For civilization to advance, we must reduce the number of wars
fought. Two conditions must be met if we hope to achieve this.

First, all military (and covert paramilitary) personnel worldwide
must refuse to initiate offensive wars beyond their borders. This must
become a matter of personal honor for every individual. Switzerland is
an example of a nation that stands strongly prepared to defend herself,
yet refuses to send troops abroad looking for trouble.

Second, the true nature of war must be laid bare, and the
glorification must end. Instead of promoting war heroes with parades and
medals for wars not fought in the true defense of our country, we
should more honestly contemplate the real results of war: death,
destruction, horrible wounds, civilian casualties, economic costs, and
the loss of liberty at home.

The neoconservative belief that war is inherently patriotic,
beneficial, manly, and necessary for human progress must be debunked.
These war promoters never send themselves or their own children off to
fight.
Some believe economic sanctions and blockades are acceptable
alternatives to invasion and occupation. But these too are acts of war,
and those on the receiving end rarely capitulate to the pressure. More
likely they remain bitter enemies, and resort to terrorism when unable
to confront us in a conventional military fashion.
Inflation, sanctions, and military threats all distort international
trade and hurt average people in all countries involved, while usually
not really hurting the targeted dictators themselves. Our bellicose
approach encourages protectionism, authoritarianism, militant
nationalism, and go-it-alone isolationism. Our government preaches free
trade and commerce, yet condemns those who want any restraints on the
use of our military worldwide. We refuse to see how isolated we have
become. Our loyal allies are few, and while the UN does our bidding only
when we buy the votes we need, our enemies multiply. A billion Muslims
around the world now see the US as a pariah.

Our military is more often used to protect private capital overseas,
such as oil and natural resources, than it is to protect our own
borders. Protecting ourselves from real outside threats is no longer the
focus of defense policy, as globalists become more influential inside
and outside our government.
The weapons industry never actually advocates killing to enhance its
profits, but a policy of endless war and eternal enemies benefits it
greatly. Some advocate cold war strategies, like those used against the
Soviets, against the unnamed “terrorists.” It’s good for business!
Many neoconservatives are not bashful about this:

Thus, paradoxically, peace increases our peril, by making
discipline less urgent, encouraging some of our worst instincts, and
depriving us of some of our best leaders. The great Prussian general
Helmuth von Moltke knew whereof he spoke when he wrote a friend,
“Everlasting peace is a dream, not even a pleasant one; war is a
necessary part of God’s arrangement of the world. … Without war the
world would deteriorate into materialism.” As usual, Machiavelli dots
his i’s and crosses the t’s: it’s not just that peace undermines
discipline and thereby gives the destructive vices greater sway. If we
actually achieved peace, “Indolence would either make (the state)
effeminate or shatter her unity; and two things together, or each by
itself, would be the cause of her ruin …” This is Machiavelli’s
variation on a theme by Mitterrand: the absence of movement is the
beginning of defeat. (Michael Ledeen, Machiavelli on Modern Leadership)

Those like Ledeen who approvingly believe in “perpetual struggle”generally are globalists, uninterested in national sovereignty and borders. True national defense is of little concern to them. That’s why military basesare closed in the United States regardless of their strategic value, whileseveral new bases are built in the Persian Gulf, even though they provokeour enemies to declare jihad against us. The new Cold War justifies everything.

War, and the threat of war, are big government’s best friend.
Liberals support big government social programs, and conservatives
support big government war policies, thus satisfying two major special
interest groups. And when push comes to shove, the two groups cooperate
and support big government across the board — always at the expense of
personal liberty. Both sides pay lip service to freedom, but neither
stands against the welfare/warfare state and its promises of unlimited
entitlements and endless war.